SC Reserves Order on Stray Dog Relocation in Delhi-NCR

New Delhi: A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its order on an interim plea seeking a stay on the August 11 suo motu directive mandating the relocation of stray dogs to shelter homes in Delhi-NCR.

Summing up the rival contentions, the apex court observed, “On one hand, humans are suffering and on the other hand, the animal lovers are here.”

Flagging that the authorities had done “nothing” to implement the Animal Birth Control Rules on sterilisation and immunisation of canines, the court said: “The whole problem is because of the inaction of local authorities. You frame rules in Parliament, the government acts, rules are framed, but no implementation is carried out — creating the problem that exists today. On one hand, humans are suffering, and on the other hand, the animal lovers want the animals to be treated with dignity.”

The bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and N.V. Anjaria was constituted to adjudicate the suo motu matter following an earlier two-judge bench order directing the permanent relocation of stray dogs from the streets to shelters.

The court heard Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and Sidharth Luthra, along with Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, before reserving its verdict on the plea to stay the August 11 order.

In its August 11 directive, a bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan had ordered Delhi authorities to start relocating stray dogs to shelters “at the earliest,” beginning with a facility to house 5,000 dogs. The NCR authorities were directed to create shelters or pounds and report back within eight weeks, with a prohibition on releasing strays from shelters.

Criticising the lack of action by the Animal Welfare Board of India, local authorities, and the government, the court remarked: “NGOs make a lot of noise, but they don’t know what they should actually be doing. They should have been here earlier for implementation of those rules. Nothing is happening.”

SG Mehta, representing the Delhi government, referred to national data on dog bites, stressing that the issue was one to be resolved rather than contested. “Children are dying, please bear in mind the silent suffering majority over a vocal minority,” he said, adding that in 2024 alone, India reported around 37.15 lakh dog bite cases, nearly 10,000 per day. He argued that while no one was advocating killing dogs, they needed to be separated from human habitations.

Sibal questioned why civic bodies had not sterilised dogs or built adequate shelters, calling the situation “very serious” and warning that without proper facilities, captured dogs could be culled. He claimed about 700 dogs had already been picked up and their whereabouts were unknown.

Singhvi argued that the August 11 directions “put the cart before the horse,” pointing out that government data showed zero rabies deaths in Delhi between 2022 and 2025, contrary to the impression of a widespread rabies crisis.

Luthra added that the order had set a precedent for High Courts to pass similar directives.

The SG countered that sterilisation did not prevent rabies, and immunisation did not stop mauling incidents. He cited WHO data showing 305 rabies deaths annually in India. “Ultimately, the solution is not in the rules; your lordships will have to intervene,” he said.

The August 11 order had sparked protests across the country, leading to the case being referred to the larger three-judge bench.